It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Gay "Zionism": Sodom for the Sodomites?

page: 3
2
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 08:30 PM
link   
reply to post by halfoldman
 

Trying hard to think of a national anthem?




posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 12:01 AM
link   
reply to post by halfoldman
 

I know, it's dreadful: but I can just imagine a stadium of butch male voices singing at our soccer/rugby matches: "First I was afraid, I was petrified..."



posted on Nov, 26 2009 @ 11:04 PM
link   
reply to post by ELECTRICkoolaidZOMBIEtest
 


Say what you will about gays, but historically, they have been pretty hardcore about fighting people.

Look up the sacred band of Thebes. Hell, the Spartans weren't exactly the straightest bunch themselves. For some reason, when it came to fightin', in ancient times, gay=badass.



posted on Nov, 27 2009 @ 03:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Doc Velocity
 


Well, Church history is not that simple. It is indeed very complex. There were no "Christians" during the lifetime of Jesus. Immediately after his death, there were Christian communities founded by some disciples and others not well known. The splits came much much later. Between Catholic in the West, and Orthodox in the East. Within Catholic Europe, Protestant split away, and in many ways fragmented even further into national churches, philosophy based sects and even cults. This fragmentation continues.

But the earliest split came in 325 at the Council of Nicea against a heresy known as the Gnostics. Funny thing, with the discovery at Nag Hammadhi we have a gospel collection that dates back to the time of the "official" gospels used today.

To tie this a bit together with the current topic, a biblical scholar named Morton Smith discovered a fragment of an excised part of an earlier version of Mark. In "The Secret Gospel" he suggests it would have been proof that Jesus was "gay friendly" So gay people having their own country could set up a bona fide Church as well.



posted on Nov, 27 2009 @ 03:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by ELECTRICkoolaidZOMBIEtest
you couldn't give the gays a country. everyone would go to war with them. and in case of a war they would be too busy makin' out to fight! well unless you instituted a dont ask dont tell policy.


Yep you couldn't have a country and have wars as they would not fight, for the survival, lol.

But in the future who knows how the world will be, lol. You have no idea what ideas tomorrows world, may find and may want.



posted on Nov, 27 2009 @ 03:32 PM
link   
reply to post by ELECTRICkoolaidZOMBIEtest
 


A Flag? Rainbow or Lambda

Capital "Copafeelia"

National Flower: The Pansy (of course)


National Ice Cream: Tuti Fruiti

National Bird: The Butterfly (hey this is a joke ya know)

National Antham: anything by Queen

National Sport: -blush-

What else?



posted on Nov, 27 2009 @ 04:16 PM
link   
Puhleeze!

This is America without gays:

Messy hair
Horrible Fashion
No theatre
White painted walls (colorless world)
Only westerns on TV and violence (in black and white)
Poor customer service from waiters
No really good daytime talk shows (wink wink Oprah)
Nobody to hate (except different races)
Failed political agendas (no one to hate)
No health guru's (lets face it, gays are better fit)
No photographers worth a spit (including most artists)
Awfully choreographed dancing (Madonna would not exist)

And the list goes on and on. Who are you going to hate after the gays are gone? I feel bad for the Jews. Once their gone; we all know it will be the blacks next. Where does this hatred stop?



posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 11:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Dromadus
 

Although I'm a huge Queen fan, strangely their music has never been that popular in the gay bars and discoes. Perhaps "We are the champions" is a good idea. If we're affiliated to the Commonwealth perhaps we should sing "God save the Queens".

Is their really a Tutti Frutti ice cream? Sounds nice. Especially if we're in the mid-east we'll need something cool. Perhaps Little Richard could market something like that for our cultural ministry.
To the posters who think gays will not defend themselves - wrong! If we only had half the closet cases in the US military we'll be alright. The only don't ask don't tell we'll have is for the closet heteros
.
As a poster above noted concerning the ancient Greeks - they knew that an army of lovers would fight twice as hard. It will truly be a case of "Meet the Spartans". Our civil population will also know how to show our men and women in uniform their appreciation, unlike other countries where servicemen are often given the cold shoulder after they return from long and suddenly unpopular wars. But hopefully it won't come to that - we'll have the military mainly for fun.

[edit on 28-11-2009 by halfoldman]



posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 12:32 PM
link   
Interesting post:
For my own thought, and having seen the gay community in the United States, for this to work you would need a country or island that could support a large population coming to live there and a means to get them there that would be economical.
But here is what you would see:
1) A community that pulls together.
2) Very little unemployment.
3) A medical system that actually does the job, even cures the people, as well as the envy of the world, including that in the plastic surgery area.
4) A community that has a technological growth.
5) A community that has no bias when it comes to race, religion or political belief.
6) A community that would be good for the environment with a heavy endevor on recycling.
7) Very little in the way of hunger, as all would eat.
8) Parties would be wild, and the communities would be colorful and diverse.
9) Privacy that would make most jealous in the rest of the world.
10) Laws/rules that everyone could understand.
11) Hate crimes punishable by expulsion and or jail time.
Sounds good, only question is where to have such to fit the diverse nature of those who are gay.



posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 02:38 PM
link   
reply to post by mdiinican
 


Yep, not Spartans, Thebans as in the following quote regarding the Sacred Band of Thebes:

"Others say that it was composed of young men attached to each other by personal affection, and a pleasant saying of Pammenes is current, that Homer's Nestor was not well skilled in ordering an army, when he advised the Greeks to rank tribe and tribe, and family and family together, that-

'So tribe might tribe, and kinsmen kinsmen aid.'

but that he should have joined lovers and their beloved. For men of the same tribe or family little value one another when dangers press; but a band cemented by friendship grounded upon love is never to be broken, and invincible; since the lovers, ashamed to be base in sight of their beloved, and the beloved before their lovers, willingly rush into danger for the relief of one another."



posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 02:35 PM
link   
reply to post by halfoldman
 

One of the reasons this will never happen is the sheer amount of top "closet" personal that will be lost to the secret societies/agencies, militaries and even religions. The mass dissertion this will cause from "homophobic" institutions will be immense and shocking to many.
When global power actually finds out WHO is actually GAY, it will be the biggest shock EVER, apart from alien disclosure.
However, it is debatable whether a Gay State will cause such mass disclosure - my guess is not entirely in the West, but still significantly.
As far as we understand "ethnicity" it will just be a bit of a reversal. Gay kids are born to hetero parents. Most ethnicity is a movement from the central "homeland" to diaspora. Ours will be opposite: a dispersal moving towards a homeland and singular "sexual" ethnicity (see Alan Sinfield's "Gay and After").



posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 04:16 PM
link   
reply to post by halfoldman
 

The question of admittance to the state has already been touched upon, however vaguely.
Although I do not imagine an anti-heterosexual state, in order to keep the character of the tiny land a majority ratio of lesbi-gay people will have to be maintained.
This may lead one into botched science for borderline cases. Are we going to employ gay "conversion-to-hetero" techniques in reverse? Will we use Kurt Freund's gadgets? (See: en.wikipedia.org...)
As a place of refuge, the state will not just be a playground for known western homosexuals. However, it must also not become a refuge for criminals and terrorists. After all, everyone can claim to be slightly gay. So how does one keep out imposters?
Another concern: if we do find a way to determine gay citizenship, will that not be mis-applied and lead to the deaths of homosexuals in homophobic countries?
To live in Homotopia should be a choice, and it should not further endanger the lives of gay people who want to remain in their native countries. Perhaps we should keep our admission criteria secret.
Maybe we should declare a kind of Monroe Doctrine and declare that any country that persecutes people on the basis of sexual orientation will be (a) boycotted (b) encourage emigration to us or an alternative liberal country (c) face a military bitch-slap of notable quality.



posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 04:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by halfoldman
reply to post by halfoldman
 

After all, everyone can claim to be slightly gay. So how does one keep out imposters?


Come on now Halfoldman, surely some kind of test can be devised


I'm sure we can think of something.... uh, letme think...gee I have a few ideas. Yeah, a citizenship exam. They study real hard and then come in for oral exams. Yep, that's it!!!



posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 10:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Dromadus
 

Well ya know, most desperate guys could bs their way through an oral exam.
Blush, ahem. I noted the site made some reforms, but I don't think they cover where this is going!

Well, I have already suggested the first criterion towards the start:
- people involved in gay causes, movements, marriages for lengthy and public periods. Obviously this includes all the open people in public life.
- the problem comes with the oppressed. I think we could allow 16-year-old refugees. There are borderlines in other cultures e.g., what about a north African male-prostitute who wants to bring his wives and children? (Just an example, nothing against North Africa) Is he gay? Does he qualify?
I suppose in such cases one would need more detailed interviews, and consider the skills of the applicant compared to the needs of the state.

[edit on 29-11-2009 by halfoldman]



posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 11:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by mdiinican
reply to post by ELECTRICkoolaidZOMBIEtest
 


Say what you will about gays, but historically, they have been pretty hardcore about fighting people.

Look up the sacred band of Thebes. Hell, the Spartans weren't exactly the straightest bunch themselves. For some reason, when it came to fightin', in ancient times, gay=badass.

And that's just the men!
We'll be cheering from the sidelines when our women kick up some real "Girl Power"!



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 03:20 AM
link   
reply to post by halfoldman
 

Not only Uganda proves gays need a state. Consider the sad case of the gay Palestinians:

"For gay Palestinians who feel persecuted at home, the obvious escape route is to Israel, but because of the political conflict this can be fraught with difficulties. As far as most Palestinians are concerned, fleeing into Israel is a betrayal of their cause, while gay men who remain in the Palestinian territories also come under suspicion.

‘In the West Bank and Gaza, it is common knowledge that if you are homosexual you are necessarily a collaborator with Israel,’ said Shaul Gonen, of the Israeli Society for the Protection of Personal Rights (‘“Death Threat” to Palestinian Gays’, BBC, 3 March 2003). Bassim Eid, of the Palestinian Human Rights Monitoring Group, explained:


In the Arab mindset, a person who has committed a moral offence is often assumed to be guilty of others, and it radiates out to the family and community. As homosexuality is seen as a crime against nature, it is not hard to link it to collaboration – a crime against nation (‘Palestinian Gay Runaways Survive on Israeli Streets’, Reuters, 17 September 2003).
Regarding gay men as politically treacherous is not unique to the Israeli-Palestinian situation. There are parallels here with Britain in the 1950s and 1960s, when gay men engaged in secret government work were treated as a particular security risk. In the popular imagination, this may well have been seen as an intrinsic part of their psychological make-up, although the fact that their sexual activities were illegal did expose them to the possibility of blackmail by Soviet agents.

Equating homosexuality with collaboration makes it extremely dangerous for Palestinians to return home after fleeing to Israel. One man told Halevi in the New Republic of a friend in the Palestinian police who ran away to Tel Aviv but later went back to Nablus, where he was arrested and accused of being a collaborator:


They put him in a pit. It was the fast of Ramadan, and they decided to make him fast the whole month but without any break at night. They denied him food and water until he died in that hole.
There is little doubt that some – though by no means all – gay Palestinians are forced by their precarious existence to work for Israeli intelligence in exchange for money or administrative favours such as the right of residence; both Eid and Gonen said they knew of several. Others, meanwhile, are coerced into undercover work for the Palestinian authorities; one 19-year-old runaway stated in an interview with Israeli television that he had been pressurized by the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade to become a suicide bomber in order to ‘purge his moral guilt’, though he had refused (‘Palestinian Gay Runaways’, Reuters, 17 September 2003)."
gaymiddleeast.blogspot.com...
How I wish I could take all transexual lesbi-gay out of there to safety.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join